Factory workers claim Foxconn hid underage employees before FLA inspection - Page 3

How is asking someone who apparently thinks everything is fine and dandy if they'd be prepared to work like that, a strawman argument?

Surely it's hypocritical to expect others to live and work in conditions you wouldn't tolerate for yourself or your family just so your favourite company can avoid parting with 0.5% of their accumulated wealth (wealth which was accumulated on the back of these workers in the first place)?

This is indeed *shocking* news!!!!

The management behaves differently when the inspectors are around as opposed to when they are not??? ZOMG!

That would *never* happen in the USA. \

Workers in a Factory have to do boring, repetitive actions all day long?

Unheard of! \

So? Since when are the workers entitled to a share of company profits?

Furthermore, your argument is incorrect. No one knows how much Foxconn makes at that factory. After all it is a Foxconn factory, not an Apple one. And, once again, why is Apple singled out when so many other companies use Foxconn?


I have a nephew named Brian. Does that help?

Besides, why is it the employer's job to make sure that the employee doesn't get bored? If the employee doesn't want a boring job, they should get an education.


That is not evidence of slave labor. Furthermore, there's no evidence that Apple uses any of those interns.

You apparently don't understand how education works. Many schools in the U.S. also require internships - even if there are no internships available in the field of study. It is not uncommon for someone to do an internship in an unrelated field. It's not slave labor by any stretch of the imagination.

It's like asking a dog if he'd rather be a human. He's always been a dog, how the hell would he know.

If you don't get that then all the explaining in the world won't help you.

I think this is the wrong argument to make.

If no one expected someone else to do work that they wouldn't do themselves, the world would stop working overnight.

There are different classes of people and jobs inside every economy/country as well as between each country. It's not like everyone in North America is drinking lattes and everyone in China is slaving in a mine. There are rich people over there and poor people over here.

A more reasonable way to look at it is how are the wages and conditions relative to the general wages and conditions of the economy/country in general?

Another good metric would be, how do the jobs in the Chinese factories compare to factory jobs anywhere else or even specifically in the North American economy?

The accusations of "repetitive, boring work" for instance are ludicrous when one is talking about work in a factory on an assembly line. The idea that you might get a relatively bad wage for doing such trash work is also obvious and prevalent everywhere, not just China.

I've had many jobs (granted not recently), that involved working in a factory doing the same stupid actions over and over again day after day for minimum wage. They were mind numbingly stupid jobs that I got out of as soon as I could, and they were all in North America.

I agree with most of what you said, especially this. However, we seem to have got away from what I was originally called on - I said Apple could spend a very small amount of their accumulated wealth (a one-off cost) in order to substantially improve the living conditions of everyone who works to make their products.

If you're going to try and tell me that that's a stupid idea, you need to come up with more convincing arguments.

I think that depends on the country's laws, which should take into account many factors such as way or life and culture.

I don't think that a 17yo that came from a rural area is going to a structured school at 17yo. I think it's similar to the US during its industrial revolution... except with plenty of cameras to record what is going on.

Personally I don't think 60 hours a week of a structured environment is too young for a 17yo, but I do think that 10 hours a week of a monotonous job is too much in the sense that they aren't learning anything. They aren't engaging their still developing minds.

That doesn't mean I would take this opportunity away from them as without it they have much less structure, little to no opportunities, and it ends up hurting their community and themselves more.



Absolutely not. With 10s of thousands of people lining up for work why would Foxconn need to hire and then hide underage workers when there are so many workers of the appropriate age willing to work?

Sounds like the pay is better at Foxconn, for Apple employes at least, than other employees at Foxconn and elsewhere. Now the hours have to be address (an eight hour day, a five day week) which will lighten the paycheque but allow for a life. Foxconn and Apple can decide if they want to pay overtime (over an 8 hour day which would then be the prerogative of the employer and employee). One meal break and two fifteen minutes breaks is the norm in the West. Problem solved.
Many would choose the work the over time. A union of sorts would benefit both employer and employee and address disagreements.
He said, she said doesn't address the problem.
The government has to become part of the picture with labour reform and labour standards.
Otherwise, who knows who is telling the truth.

I know what you mean Ireland. Shame we can't pass off all the nutters to 9to5Mac lol.

I am the one making a 'straw man argument'?! If you know what that means, look in the mirror.

More to the point, if I (and my family) lived in the conditions that most of Foxconn's labor pool does, you bet your patootie I would do it. Gladly. Joyfully. Thankfully.

In fact, I'd be really distressed at condescending - even if well-meaning - Westerners judging me and telling me how I should live my life.

As someone said in a different thread a little while ago, if Apple offered two iPads that are identical: one for $499 and the other for $549 where Apple promised that the extra $50 would go to provide better accommodations for Foxconn workers, which line would you stand in?

Then they should quit, let someone else have the job, go write an opera or something.

Of course it's not a stupid idea but, and I've said this before, Foxconn is not an island unto itself. We don't know if there is any pressure on Foxconn from the government to maintain an environment that isn't too far above the status quo. Raising the standard of living for one small group of people (yes, even a million people is a small group in China) could cause a lot of disruption throughout the entire manufacturing base.

... and, as I've also said before, anyone who doubts this just has to read about the labor movements in the U.S. and Britain. Changes at one plant creates a chain of events all the way down the line.

Yes, you are. I suggested making a one-off spend and your reply failed to address the point and instead made a silly retort.


I pay extra for my meat to ensure that the animals had a better life whilst they were alive.

Anyway, your question is irrelevant. Apple has already accumulated enough wealth to address living conditions. I've think I've already made it clear I don't really have a problem with wages.

I am aware of this. I'm not saying Apple should make living conditions in all of China better. I think Apple have enough money that they could make living conditions for people manufacturing Apple products better. Apple has no obligation to improve conditions for those working on other products.

This would increase supply of workers wishing to work on Apple production lines and enable Foxconn to cherry-pick the most able workers for said Apple lines. This improves manufacturing efficiency and/or quality for Apple and puts pressure on other Foxconn clients to step up and improve conditions for their workers.

You obviously didn't understand my comment.

Adding to this, she's doing a lot of "Apple needs to" without first going to the local government and demanding laws are changed.

Plus there's a lot of assumption and supposition going on without real facts to back it up.

For example, at what point is a teenager no longer a legally mandated student. By that I mean is it legally possible that a 16-17 year old has completed all required education and simply isn't going on to university and instead going into trade work. This is possible in the UK etc even though the US system isn't set up that way (which is why we have rules about no more than 20 hours a week, not after 9pm during the school year etc). Chan seems to be assuming that all 16-17 year olds are or are supposed to be in school. Is this true.

Then there's the living wage issue. According to recent articles, these workers make roughly $1.80 an hour. they have the choice to pay $17 a month to live in the dorms (which most of them do) and spend about $2.50 a day for meals in the cafe. So their room and board is roughly $92 a month. I don't know the tax game in China but in the US, someone can lose around 1/3 of their pay in various taxes so lets use that math. That's still $192 for someone that works 5 day a week 8 hours a day. With rent, food and utilities covered that's $100 left for them to do whatever with. That math doesn't sound like anyone is forced into working overtime to live (unless they want a more posh life).

Also are they being paid extra for OT and under china law when does that kick in. It is possible that in China 12 hours a day isn't OT, nor is 6 days a week. Which means that the laws are the issue, not Foxconn. Because the workers would know that that is the score as it is the score everywhere.

Reports like this are half formed and that irks me. Almost as much as that "Agony and Ecstasy of Steve Jobs" show where the guy wrote it mostly off of rumor and admits he has no understand of Chinese law or culture and from his tone doesn't care to understand.

oops. Sorry.

So you are suggesting that perhaps there is a Chinese government conspiracy that prevents Foxconn improving the living conditions of its workers?

And to whom do you think that money belongs?

The activists want to make it sound like parents are yanking their dumb teens out of school and sending them to work to support the family when that might not be the case at all.


Maybe they should be sent back to school cause they aren't smart enough to understand what factory work is. Nor that they haven't sold themselves to the company for life so they have the right to quit and they should use it.

It's like that one article that quoted the woman that took a temp job during her uni 'spring break' (which was about a month long). She said she wanted to make some quick and fairly easy money but then complained about long hours etc. She actually made the comment that she was quitting in a week to go back to school and she was going to work night and day to make sure she got perfect marks so she'd never have to come back to a place like Foxconn again.

These kids haven't figured that last bit out yet

$50 is way too much. If an iPad cost an extra $14.10, that would allow an extra 10 cents for each of the 141 steps needed to make one.

If the deal was that the worker got 8 cents and Foxcon got 2 cents, the worker's pay would go up hugely, Foxcon's profits would go up hugely, Apple would lose nothing, and lots of people would pay an extra $14.10.

That is my guess, anyways.

Assuming they all make $1.78 per hour and there are 400k employees working on Apple products that's over $2 billion a year lose in profit. While I'm all for other making more money if they are currently well above the average with people begging for jobs does it make sense to pay them more for a job that takes little to no skill set?

What if that wage doubling would be the shift that would fire half the workforce in favour of automation? Now you have 200k less jobs with those employees making no money and living on the street or going back home to farms that can't satisfactorily offer gainful employment, food or perhaps even shelter.

That was just a simple way for me to make an example. I realize that you specifically mentioned living conditions not base pay. Now I agree that the living conditions could be improved and I would even go so far to say that the living conditions over anything else is likely the cause of the suicide. There is privacy, no adequate personal space to call your own, but at some point increasing the standard of living will have the same effect in the scenario above. Robots don't need a place to sleep and eat. They don't need private bathrooms or game rooms.

This seems to be the same thing we've seen in history books with so many other countries industrializing... except with cameras. I wonder if it's our place to say how they should be run. I also wonder why we are focusing on Foxconn when there are other countries that have a lot more people suffering with no hope of a Foxconn-like factory giving them a chance to work and live in a clean and safe environment.



If we just account for the 141 stations mentioned for the iPad that $50 gets stripped down to an additional 36¢ per iPad per person on that line at any one time. How many iPads can they make in a day?

I'm willing to pay that. I have even said that Apple has priced the iPad too because it has no competition and it stays hard to come by for far too long in its release cycle.

It belongs to Apple and Apple is owned by its shareholders. It's Apple's management that get to decide how the $100 billion is spent.

I honestly think it beggars belief that you think it'd be wrong to spend 0.5% of that wealth to improve living conditions of those making Apple products.

I wouldn't say it's a conspiracy. This is standard business practice all over the world.

No. More like 3.5 months. By my own more 'conservative' math they would have $100 left over for play, sending to the family back home etc even just doing 40 hours a month. If they kept all that money themselves in roughly half a year they could buy an iPad. Not the fanciest but they could. That of course assumes that the prices are the same in the US. They likely are not so it would probably be more like 8 months to cover that difference. Kids in the US save that long with allowance and such for the same goal

If they worked OT such as a 6th 8 hour day or even 12 hours all six days, that's another roughly $150 in the bank assuming they don't make a higher wage for those hours.

Define decent. Because right now they are making a wage that can provide them with a roof, food etc even if it's not a penthouse suite, gourmet meals and such


Boredom is not illegal. And not something an employer should have to fix. They aren't slaves, they can quit. Little tricks like moving them around the lines is costly as they would have to retrain everyone and then after a couple of days they would just be bored doing something new. Playing music etc can lead to issue because maybe not everyone likes that music and they are being forced to listen to something they detest not to mention possible safety hazard if they can't hear a warning bell going off on the other side of the room. and so on

And what about the other 75 clients. Should they put in offices and hotlines and police the factory as well.

So I guess SACOM is what a slacktivist joins when they can't figure out what to occupy? I think the people with the most to say in this matter are the Chinese workers, and judging by the turnout for new hires, they don't seem to mind on the whole. With as many employees as Foxconn has, it would be almost impossible not to find some disgruntled employees to talk to SACOM. If rapid changes cause some workers to lose their jobs because their job got outsourced or replaced by automation, how does this help the individual? Change will come, but it must evolve at its own rate. All Apple owes the worker is to not stand in the way of this evolution, and it appears to me that Apple is trying to facilitate change.

The other key difference is that during the industrialisation of "the west", there weren't any nations who had already been through the process.

I maintain that Apple could spend an insignificant (to them) sum of money and substantially improve the living conditions (and by this I specifically mean living quarters so perhaps I should adopt that phrase) of the human beings who assemble their products.

So you have been in the quarters they live in. That's how you know how awful they are. And now much everyone hates them. Because you talked to all those poor unfortunate workers as well.

From what we have been shown they aren't posh but they aren't dung heaps either. Nor are people forced to live there. They can get another place if they want to spend the money. Most of them choose not to.

I don't have to have seen them. We know that the living quarters consist of shared dormitories with very little personal space and shared washing facilities. I believe that humans working for an entity that has the means to ensure that the living quarters are substantially better, shouldn't have to live in those conditions.


Probably because they aren't paid enough to do that.

We've seen them in the video. They are awful. Some things we can easily say transcend culture and having 8 people in a small room with no chance for privacy does take its psychological toll. They are human, right?

For starters, I think that reducing the housing to half, but still having a shared bathroom between 2 quarters would be more effective. I'd also allow for more individuality within the dorms. We saw it with hairstyles but I didn't see it with anything else.

The issue I saw with the assembly line and white, dust free gowns and hats wasn't about a hardship in labor that other youths aren't enduring but psychological stress from not having an outlet to forge or express your own individuality in some way.

Just as I honestly think it beggars believe that you think that it's Apple's job to rectify all the world's wrongs.

Apple has created hundreds of thousands of jobs in China - jobs that apparently pay considerably more than the alternatives. They have engaged in free market purchasing - they worked out a price that Foxconn was apparently quite willing to do the work for. Foxconn similarly has a free market arrangement with its employees. They offer a wage and the employees chose to work for them. if the employees did not think it was a good deal, they could go elsewhere.

I'm just curious. Where do you draw the line? After all, by your logic, Apple has lots of money. They should:
- Fix the working conditions at all of their suppliers. They should pay more money to Samsung so that Samsung can pay more to its employees, for example.
- Fix the poor food quality problems in China. As has been argued here, food in China is not readily available with the same nutritional content as ours. Apple should set up its own farms and give the food away. They can afford it.
- Health care in China is atrocious. Apple should build hospitals and offer free health care.
- Pollution in China is worse than in any city I've seen in the U.S. Apple should buy electric cars for everyone.
And so on.
- Heck, even in the U.S., our working conditions are worse than some other countries. Apple should offer a year of paid maternity leave and should limit its employees to 28 hours per week globally (to match Netherlands' work week) and provide a guaranteed 44 days off per year to match Finland).

After all, Apple can afford to do those things, so why shouldn't they? Right?

Once again, you're imposing your culture on another country which has a different culture. The concept of individuality in China is far different than ours. To a very large degree, enforcing individuality can be painful for people who grew up in a conformist culture.

No, I do not believe it's Apple's job to rectify all the world's wrongs. I believe that Apple has the means to improve the living standards of the human beings who assemble Apple products, and should cough up. They'd still have over $99 billion left.

The concept is different, but not the existence of. I made no mention of what culture should be applied or what cultures held more values over others. I clearly referred only to humanity. I also noted that it would help make the "people" more content which would reduce suicides.

Sometimes separating people into smaller groups can cause suicides.

[I remember when a lot of Vietnamese people were emigrating to Canada in the mid to late 70s. I made friends with quite a few of the newcomers and was shocked to find them living 4 to 8 people to a room. When I mentioned this to them they were actually quite baffled that it would bother me so much. Later, though, as they became westernized, they, of course, separated into their own homes, but, there again, many more family members lived in the home then we, westerners, would find normal.]

If some employees are yapping, Foxconn clearly hid the wrong ones.

The whole thing still smells dubious - so many employees ostensibly abused there. Yet the best investigative teams in the world have produced so few first hand statements?

Hmmm ....

starting at the end


No, Apple couldn't afford to do everything you listed.


OK, I'll play.


No.


No.


No.


No.


Yes


No, those both seem excessive but I'm guessing that I would think they should provide more paid holiday than they do. Paid holiday allowance in the U.S. sucks.

LOL, haha

Unfortunately there has to be a way Apple can profit for it to make sense. However, I that is easily done by allowing the workers happier which will increase productivity, longer employment per individual, and result in increase goodwill among buyers. Their "green" initiative falls into the latter category.

I don't agree with Apple doing it just because they have the money. The Chinese government has a lot more money so why are we expecting them to better there way of life?